Boeing Supporters Vow To Ask "Tough Questions" About
Choice

It barely took an hour after the Pentagon announced its choice
for the US Air Force KC-X tanker bid, before lawmakers aligned with
the loser spoke out vehemently against the decision.

As ANN reported in Real Time Friday
afternoon, the team comprised of Northrop Grumman and
European Aeronautic Defense and Space Company (EADS) was awarded
the $40 billion contract, over the bid submitted by American
planemaker Boeing. Under terms of the deal, Northrop/EADS will
supply the Air Force with 179 KC-45A aerial refueling tankers,
based on the Airbus A330 commercial airliner.

Sue Payton, assistant secretary of the Air Force for
acquisition, noted the larger EADS/Northrop offering was the
stronger contender in several areas.

"Northrop Grumman clearly provided the best value to the
government," Payton said, adding the Airbus-allied group's plane
earned superior marks for mission capability, past performance and
in several other categories.

Proponents of the KC-767, on the other hand, had touted that
aircraft as the better alternative, due to its smaller size --
allowing the Air Force to place more tankers on the ramp than the
larger Airbus-sourced plane. The KC-767 was also substantially
cheaper.

Many analysts and lawmakers had pegged Boeing's KC-767 as the
winner, to the point Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson's office
issued a statement Friday congratulating Boeing as the winner,
according to Reuters. It was quickly retracted.

Lawmakers from Washington and Kansas -- states closely aligned
with Boeing, and home to plants that would have benefitted greatly
from a Boeing win -- reacted swiftly to the news... and they
weren't pleased.

Kansas Representative Todd Tiahrt (above) vowed to seek a review
of the decision "at the highest levels of the Pentagon and
Congress," with the hope of reversing the choice.

"I am deeply troubled by the Air Force's decision to award the
KC-X tanker to a French company that has never built a tanker in
its history," he said. "We should have an American tanker built by
an American company with American workers. I cannot believe we
would create French jobs in place of Kansas jobs."

The Congressional delegation from Seattle said they were
"outraged" by the choice. "We are outraged that this decision taps
European Airbus and its foreign workers to provide a tanker to our
American military," said a joint statement from Washington Senators
Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell, and with six other lawmakers from
the area. "We will be asking tough questions about the decision to
outsource this contract. We look forward to hearing the Air Force's
justification."

Predictably, lawmakers from Alabama -- where EADS vowed to
locate the final assembly plant for the KC-45A, as well as the
upcoming Airbus A330-200 Freighter, if it was selected the KC-X
winner -- were quite pleased with the Pentagon's decision.

"We are so very excited about having the opportunity to help the
Air Force acquire the most modern and capable refueling tanker -- a
tanker assembled in America -- by Americans," said Alabama
Congressman Jo Bonner.

"I thought all along that the Northrop Grumman-EADS proposal was
the best," Alabama Senator Richard Shelby told reporters, adding he
understood the disappointment from Boeing supporters.

"If Boeing had won this contract ... I would have been concerned
about it," Shelby admitted.